Some thoughts:
Intel has already clearly stated their position:
On November 3-4, 2016, emails exchanged between HDC and Intel’s outside
counsel stated, for the first time, that Intel (wrongly) believed that HDC’s patents
were invalid and Intel did not infringe.
It does not appear to me that INTC violates the patents, but rather provides a product that allows others to violate the patent.
Actually their Libraries such as Scikit-learn to state one area?
Scikit-learn is not an Intel product but is open source that was started by some google engineers and then continued by some french dudes.
I can't imagine Intel being held accountable for what is in somebody else's product.
With regards to discovery, you can't really ask "Intel", but rather need to know the right person inside Intel to ask. You will also notice in the suit that Intel specifically asked HDVY which products violated the patent. They did not answer this question, but rather referenced Intel presentations that talked about SVM-RFE. This suit does mention specific products like FPGAs and Xeon CPUs. It is possible for customers to run the SVM-RFE algorithm on these products, but it is not "included" with the product. IF HDVY were to depose engineers working on the Xeon or FPGA products, this is likely to be their testimony. You should note that we are talking about SVM-RFE here, but are in no way violating the patent. Intel may note that their products are great at running the SVM-RFE algorithm, but this does not prove infringement on their part, but rather points to their customers.
--Alan
